The curious case of Rasmus Ristolainen: ?

[hockeyhound]

I thought it was a very factually based article, looking at various possible explanations for Risto's poor analytics vs. the eye test which says he's better than that. The author states up front that usually those two view points align. However in this case, they diverge quite significantly. It's interesting to dig around and try to discern why this is the case. It got me thinking, anyway. 

 

Risto is only 22 but has 3.5 seasons of full-time NHL playing experience. It's not unreasonable to assess his performance to date and start to draw conclusions about where he'll end up. The author acknowledges he has room to grow but it's not like we are talking about an 18 or 19 year old who hasn't played in the NHL yet. 

 

In terms of the "borderline misrepresentation" comment, I read it quite differently. If you accept the premise that Risto is a 2nd line D-man playing extreme 1st pairing minutes because he's the best the Sabres have, then in fact that is one of the primary reasons the Sabres were bad last year. It's not a shot at Risto, simply an acknowledgement of the weak talent on the blue line and to some extent how they were coached. I think most people on this board accept that viewpoint so some degree or another so this is not new news. 

 

I want to see how he plays with about 2 minutes less per game and please God no Josh Gorges out there with him. 

 

 

I'd have to respectfully disagree with the assertion that the article was “very factual”.

 

Firstly, "One of the most divisive players in hockey", OK I get it, you needed a hook and an opening line; however, I'm sorry I don't buy it. Go head, and drop Risto's name into the search bar, and I'm fairly certain the only divisive rhetoric you will find as a result has been created by Mr. Luszczyszyn. Hockey fans around the world are not having polarizing arguments about Ristolainen's performance or the lack thereof. A poll of 2,999 people certainly doesn't prove that Rasmus Ristolainen is one of the most divisive players in hockey, and the comment section at the bottom of his article or posts within this topic page won't support Mr. Luszczyszyn allegations either.

 

I'm surprised what passes for factual and accurate.

 

Mr. Luszczyszyn presents a poll which he admits is biased and non-scientific, so one cannot enter that into evidence.

 

Next, there is a Corsi graph, why is it there? I don’t know. Mr. Luszczyszyn certainly didn’t take the time to explain it, so at best its there to make the article look profound or “fascinating”, as one commenter states.

 

So that leaves us with, “One of the big findings”, “The man that tracked the zone entries”. We don’t know this man’s qualifications as a statistician but, we do know that the stats presented are incomplete, and that he was back at it again. The fact that he was back at it again should count for something right.

 

So what does that leave us with?

 

Biased polling data, an undefined graph, and incomplete statistical analysis.

 

Now the question I have is, “Where’s the Beef?” In my opinion, Mr. Luszczyszyn attempted to baffle us with bullshi*, and pass his body of work off as a factual and accurate analysis of Rasmus Ristolainen’s performance as a professional hockey player.

 

My suggestion is to leave the analysis up to the professionals, and maybe try drinking beer and watching hockey with the rest of us. That’s just my opinion.

Finally, Mr. Luszczyszyn made one factual comment in his final statement, “Sabres fans may not like it…”

 

Let’s Go Buffalo!

Edited August 14, 2017 by hockeyhound

[SwampD]

I'd have to respectfully disagree with the assertion that the article was “very factual”.

 

Firstly, "One of the most divisive players in hockey", OK I get it, you needed a hook and an opening line; however, I'm sorry I don't buy it. Go head, and drop Risto's name into the search bar, and I'm fairly certain the only divisive rhetoric you will find as a result has been created by Mr. Luszczyszyn. Hockey fans around the world are not having polarizing arguments about Ristolainen's performance or the lack thereof. A poll of 2,999 people certainly doesn't prove that Rasmus Ristolainen is one of the most divisive players in hockey, and the comment section at the bottom of his article or posts within this topic page won't support Mr. Luszczyszyn allegations either.

 

I'm surprised what passes for factual and accurate.

 

Mr. Luszczyszyn presents a poll which he admits is biased and non-scientific, so one cannot enter that into evidence.

 

Next, there is a Corsi graph, why is it there? I don’t know. Mr. Luszczyszyn certainly didn’t take the time to explain it, so at best its there to make the article look profound or “fascinating”, as one commenter states.

 

So that leaves us with, “One of the big findings”, “The man that tracked the zone entries”. We don’t know this man’s qualifications as a statistician but, we do know that the stats presented are incomplete, and that he was back at it again. The fact that he was back at it again should count for something right.

 

So what does that leave us with?

 

Biased polling data, an undefined graph, and incomplete statistical analysis.

 

Now the question I have is, “Where’s the Beef?” In my opinion, Mr. Luszczyszyn attempted to baffle us with bullshi*, and pass his body of work off as a factual and accurate analysis of Rasmus Ristolainen’s performance as a professional hockey player.

 

My suggestion is to leave the analysis up to the professionals, and maybe try drinking beer and watching hockey with the rest of us. That’s just my opinion.

Finally, Mr. Luszczyszyn made one factual comment in his final statement, “Sabres fans may not like it…”

 

Let’s Go Buffalo!

You left out the next line, though. "At least, among those two groups from above [the numbers vs. the eye test folk]." I don't think out of line. Whenever he is being discussed on either NHLN or NBCSN, the first thing an analyst brings up is how his numbers don't match the eye.

 

I have no problem with the article. I personally don't think most defenders become who they are until about 25 or 26 anyway.

[LGR4GM]

I can't figure out why Risto doesn't pass the numbers test but does the eye test. He is like reverse Pysyk. My only conclusion is that he is good in a bunch of situations but in a few others utterly bad. I also think that his playing good has been hampered by system and teammates. Last year we really only had 2 good lines. He's going to be 22 this season, I think it is the season to see what he really is. A really good 2nd pairing guy or a mediocre 1st pairing guy. All I know is he is better than every other defender in his draft class not named Jones.

Edited August 14, 2017 by LGR4GM

[TheAud]

 

Next, there is a Corsi graph, why is it there? I don’t know. Mr. Luszczyszyn certainly didn’t take the time to explain it

 

 

 

I think the Corsi graph is the crux of the discussion. The author mistakenly assumes that his readers understand it and it's implications. Knowledge is contextual. In this case, apparently, you don't get it. Hence I can understand why you don't like the article. 

[Lanny]

I can't figure out why Risto doesn't pass the numbers test but does the eye test. He is like reverse Pysyk. My only conclusion is that he is good in a bunch of situations but in a few others utterly bad. I also think that his playing good has been hampered by system and teammates. Last year we really only had 2 good lines. He's going to be 22 this season, I think it is the season to see what he really is. A really good 2nd pairing guy or a mediocre 1st pairing guy. All I know is he is better than every other defender in his draft class not named Jones.

I think usage is his issue, he plays the most minutes against the toughest competition with the lowest offensive zone deployment on the team. 

[Thorny]

I remember when the Hockey News was a credible source for hockey info. Those were the days.

[SabresFanInRochester]

I'm not completely on board with assuming he'd not a franchise D. I want to see him with competent coaching and put in positions to succeed rather than the exact opposite which is all he's received up to this point.

 

 

See I dont accept the premise he is a no 2, I think he is a number 1, still inexperienced, playing too many minutes in a crap system that dictated he give up the blue line and that is the reason for the somewhat disconnect between the numbers and eye test.

 

Count me in, too. I am excited to see how he steps up this year under a new coach, and how much defensive pressure is taken off of him by (what I will call) more competent defensemen compared to last season.

[hockeyhound]

I think the Corsi graph is the crux of the discussion. The author mistakenly assumes that his readers understand it and it's implications. Knowledge is contextual. In this case, apparently, you don't get it. Hence I can understand why you don't like the article. 

 

As I so stated before, Mr. Luszczyszyn said at the end of his article, “Sabres fans may not like it…”

 

Is it to much to ask a writer who represents a well known periodical to try a little harder especially if he/she is going to boldly state his/her opinions.

 

Understanding Advanced Hockey Statistics  e.g. Corsi or Fenwick Numbers: I'm sure some of the more dedicated fans can take the raw data and make observations that are directly related to the hypothesis they're considering; however, in my opinion, there is something to be said about the accuracy and efficiency of data interpretation, especially for those who publish their findings, and are seeking to attract a more diverse audience. 

 

There is ability and luck, how do measure luck, sophomore slumps, poor coaching, and long term lingering injuries into the stats? So many variables. If Rasmus Ristolainen is to be judged, how can you truly judge him if you don't have all the facts? 

 

Recently I had the opportunity to see the movie "Trouble with a Curve" starring Clint Eastwood who plays an aging baseball scout. Eastwood's character Gus has disdain for computer scouting while the protagonists lives and dies by computer statistics and thinks first-hand observation is a relic of the past. Great Flix

 

Let's Go Buffalo!

[Doohickie]

I don't care if he's the 123rd ranked Dman in the NHL statistically, as long as the Sabres win.

[sabills]

https://www.thebuffalostar.com/2017/09/the-case-for-rasmus-ristolainen/

 

A good breakdown of why Risto's stats are the way they are (maybe) by Matthew Coller. 

 

Featuring a Josie original painting.

[Eleven]

Nice painting Josie!

[LGR4GM]

Great read. Risto might be the break out candidate of the year. 

[pi2000]

Interesting quote from the article... 

 

"Player stats in hockey can only be analyzed within the team."

 

...this is why I came up the team relative +/-, which is a reflection of how much a player helps or hurts the team within the context of the team's overall performance.

 

That said, Risto, while logging a -9 +/-, had a +7 TRpm this past season.

[Taro T]

https://www.thebuffalostar.com/2017/09/the-case-for-rasmus-ristolainen/

 

A good breakdown of why Risto's stats are the way they are (maybe) by Matthew Coller. 

 

Featuring a Josie original painting.

Nice article & excellent illustration.

 

But it highlights why Bylsma was so darn frustrating & why he's currently out of a job. He KNEW what he needed to do to put his players in positiins to succeed (he talked a great game) but at the slightest sign of adversity stopped listening to his head & instead went w/ what that tightened sphincter suggested. "No, no, don't give Ristolainen reasonable ice time & role - make him into Gorges for 27 minutes / night. Don't give O'Reilly reasonable minutes working off a leg injury - skate him down to the cement. It may be easier on your players to control the puck, but that's also easier on the opposing D that are being chased down by speedsters like Moulson - dump it & make the D turn it back up before Matty reaches the face off dot."

 

:angry:

[jeffismagic]

https://www.thebuffalostar.com/2017/09/the-case-for-rasmus-ristolainen/

 

A good breakdown of why Risto's stats are the way they are (maybe) by Matthew Coller. 

 

Featuring a Josie original painting.

 

Awesome! Thanks for that good read.

[inkman]

https://www.thebuffalostar.com/2017/09/the-case-for-rasmus-ristolainen/

 

A good breakdown of why Risto's stats are the way they are (maybe) by Matthew Coller.

 

Featuring a Josie original painting.

Man I'm not sure I can root harder than I'm going to for our strapping young Dman to kill it this season.

[dudacek]

Hockey analytics don’t tell you if a player is good, they tell you if a situation is working. - best quote I've read in some time.

[Eleven]

Hockey analytics don’t tell you if a player is good, they tell you if a situation is working. - best quote I've read in some time.

 

Absolutely, and from one of the pioneers in the field.

[North Buffalo]

Awesome read and quote... everything we have been saying for months.

[That Aud Smell]

Nice article & excellent illustration.

 

But it highlights why Bylsma was so darn frustrating & why he's currently out of a job. He KNEW what he needed to do to put his players in positiins to succeed (he talked a great game) but at the slightest sign of adversity stopped listening to his head & instead went w/ what that tightened sphincter suggested. "No, no, don't give Ristolainen reasonable ice time & role - make him into Gorges for 27 minutes / night. Don't give O'Reilly reasonable minutes working off a leg injury - skate him down to the cement. It may be easier on your players to control the puck, but that's also easier on the opposing D that are being chased down by speedsters like Moulson - dump it & make the D turn it back up before Matty reaches the face off dot."

 

:angry:

 

Yep. He did not have the courage of his convictions.

[LGR4GM]

my thoughts on Bylsma

[MattPie]

Ahem, from the Coller article: But if you don’t know when to disregard bad stats, you end up thinking plus-minus is a great measure of defense or batting average is the best baseball stat there is.

[LGR4GM]

Hockey analytics don’t tell you if a player is good, they tell you if a situation is working. - best quote I've read in some time.

Totally agree. Great quote

[ubkev]

Ahem, from the Coller article: But if you don’t know when to disregard bad stats, you end up thinking plus-minus is a great measure of defense or batting average is the best baseball stat there is.

I understand the value of OPS, but damn, I love it when a guy can hit at .320 avg.

[Thorny]

I understand the value of OPS, but damn, I love it when a guy can hit at .320 avg.

Yup. It's like when people say RBI means nothing. No, if a guy has 80 RBI, he's good.